THE PEOPLE’S WILL VERSUS JUDICIAL RAW WILL

The US Supreme Court’s so-called “domestic relations exception to federal subject matter jurisdiction,” which we call the DRE, is in fact simply a disclaimer of the federal court’s duties and obligations under Article III of the US Constitution.

The DRE has been created by a federal judicial raw will. Raw will means that the federal judges created the DRE without any authority in the constitution or any federal legal text and without seeking authority from the US executive or legislative branches.

in the states’ process of domestic relations cases demonstrates that the federal court scholars and the federal bar have wrongfully catered to federal judges. I use the acronym “DRE” to define this federal court practice of limiting the People’s access to federal justice to seek redress against states in domestic relations matters.

As a result of the DRE,
an unauthorized and intolerable situation has squirmed into state legal
processes involving US post-divorce domestic relations matters. Over time state judges and lawyers has
developed a widely shared but completely false belief that family law judges
have special legal powers, so called “wide discretion,” over family matters
including those affecting the People’s freedom of religion, speech and
political ideology and their rights to raise their children free from
government interference. Nothing could
be more distant from the truth or the law. Nowhere is judicial discretion more
constrained by law and as a matter of nature and general ethical principles
than in the area of domestic relations. Unfortunately, once the judges and
lawyers agree on a court room scheme, the governor and the state attorney general
simply defend the chief judges and their judges. Thus the People’s Will, their legislatures,
the assemblies of the People’s representatives is by-passed and the People’s
Will and freedoms is usurped by judges and lawyers. Of course, this is a violation of the most basic
American constitutional rights—but with the Governor and State Attorney General
protecting the Chief Judge and the DRE, the People’s Will is left out.

All judges are
constrained by statutes and legal precedence. Judicial jurisdiction is
constrained by the People’s assemblies and rules governing the legal issues and
the creation of legal materials, such as evidence. No judge has any power or
authority to impose his own preferences into law and order in general, and most
certainly into domestic relations.
Why? Because domestic relations
questions cannot be adjudicated through unbiased neutral standards and
principles. Without general standards a
judge can indulge his own preferences without legal authority or reasoning. Thus the DRE creates judicial hubris in an
area of law where natural and legal law mandates judicial humility. In the end
this is a clash of wills between the People and chief judges where the governors
and state attorney general’s automatically go on the wrong side, against the
People. Without federal intervention the People are no match for these govern
officials.

The result of having
exalted government officials giving power to judges and lawyers without
legislative authority or federal oversight over the People’s most precious and
unalienable rights is deliberate judicial corruption designed to cause
agitation, aggravation, disturbance and disruptions in our families.

On the day before
Thanksgiving, I filed a unprecedented federal civil rights complaint aimed
directly that the massive judicial corruption that the DRE allowed to creep New
York State’s custody cases. The suit is
supported by conclusive hard evidence, hard won evidence notwithstanding the
Chief Judge Janet M. DiFiore’s interferences and retaliations, demonstrating
that Adetokunbo O. Fasanya, a New York County Family Court Magistrate, acted as
exalted government agent’s act: he colluded with his own agents, fabricated
charges, manufactured charges and fees out of thin air. Chief Judge DiFiore
barred the evidence acquired by my investigation, which I commenced on May 15,
2014, from all New York courts, including her own New York’s court of last
resort, the Court of Appeals. The
investigation details the official misconduct of 123 state senior officials,
including 26 judges. This is unfortunate
in one way, fortunate in others. Chief Judge DiFiore’s took part in 63 orders
including 8 at the Court of Appeals without ever allowing any legal
proceedings. It was the only way for her to protect Fasanya and her
system. We will see the story she
fabricates in federal court as she attempts to conceal herself under the DRE. I did it for my family, and my heritage Cuban
refugee from the Bay of Pigs era who is a product of New York’s parochial
Catholic school system who went on to graduate Penn and Wharton. Hopefully, my family will be one of the last
to suffer the pain of having an exalted government official invade their
homes.